Ask a Catholic

Can you give a brief explanation of the immaculate conception?
I have been traveling, but now I can get back to this. Let's take a look at some Bible passages. The first is Jeremiah 1:5; the second is Luke 1:47, 49 where Mary is speaking to Elizabeth.

“I knew you before I formed you in your mother's womb. Before you were born I set you apart and appointed you as my prophet to the nations.”

My Spirit rejoices in God my savior. The mighty one has done great things for me...


We should also look at the translations of Luke 1:28 which include "Full of grace"; "favored one"; and "highly favored one". Nuances are often lost in translating from one language to another. The original Greek uses the word
kecharitomene.

The root, commonly translated as 'grace' has the Greek meaning of a supernatural endowment by God. In other words, nothing Mary did in her life earned her grace, it was already given to her by God; it is His favor, His kindness. The suffix emphasizes this; that Mary was acted upon. The prefix determines the tense. It tells us that Mary had already been acted upon and that God's favor and grace was continuing.

Aren't God's actions perfect? Can sin--even original sin--prevail over God? Another questions is, How did Protestants come to drop this teaching? The Catholic Church is rooted in Greek, Latin, and even Aramaic. It is also steeped in tradition. The original Protestants were studying a book that had been translated into English (or any other common language). They lost both nuance and tradition. Meanwhile, Catholics insisted upon keeping the original nuances and tradition.

An interesting side note is the Orthodox do not acknowledge the Immaculate Conception...because...the Orthodox hold no belief in Original Sin. Protestants believe in Original Sin and insist Mary, by being human, was born with this sin.

I don't know that this qualifies as brief, but I gave it a try. ;)
 
Does anyone have any questions or concerns about the Catholic faith?
So what is worse in your opinion, building walls, (an obvious shot at Trump) that the Pope says will send you to hell or having an abortion that is murder according to the official position of the church that the Pope seems to ignore?

And should Joe Biden, who is the most famous and powerful Catholic in the world, be denied communion for not only supporting abortion, but wanting us all to pay for it?
 
So what is worse in your opinion, building walls, (an obvious shot at Trump) that the Pope says will send you to hell or having an abortion that is murder according to the official position of the church that the Pope seems to ignore?
First, the Catholic position on hell: It is separation from God, a decision made by the individual, not by God. God's position is repentance for the forgiveness of sins; sins are forgiven. One has to choose the sin knowing and desiring that the result will be separation from God. The closest any Catholic (even the Pope) has ever said about being "sent" to hell, is noting that grave sin places one in danger of hell.

Second, it is not so much a Catholic position on abortion, but the Catholic position on life. Catholics see life as God's greatest gift, from conception to natural death. Abortion stomps on that position. Even so, every Catholic parish I've lived in has programs that help people through regrets they now have, or the pain they are suffering, over having an abortion.

The Apostles (Church) was given a mission by Christ to spread the good news. That good news is "Sins are forgiven; repentance for the forgiveness of sins." I do not see the Pope ignoring this position. Catholics can be (and are) equally passionate about all life from conception to natural death being embraced and respected, as well as the passion we feel over Jesus' proclamation that sins are forgiven.
 
And should Joe Biden, who is the most famous and powerful Catholic in the world, be denied communion for not only supporting abortion, but wanting us all to pay for it?
In my opinion, yes--both he and Nancy Pelosi. This was an issue the Church grappled with early on, because the Church also believes, acknowledges, and supports free will. However, as time has gone on, we see people in government (especially "Catholic" politicians) pushing abortion at all stages and financing abortions at all stages which goes against the free will of those who are adamant that not one taxpayer dollar be used.

Each politician has their own choice: Be a model Catholic as they are in the public eye; or choose another faith that better represents their own beliefs. Both politicians are clear about their beliefs--those beliefs are not Catholic--and so in effect they have already excommunicated themselves. The Church should make it official. My opinion.
 
Can sin--even original sin--prevail over God?
Thanks for the answering the question about Mary.

Original sin can't prevail over God, but God left our universe over it and humans lost their domain over Earth (paradise originally) to Satan. Original sin prevails over humans, so that is the HUGE problem. It means the paradise meant for all of us will only be for a few. It means God will have to destroy ALL humans by water and fire even though Jesus saves the believers.
 
So what is worse in your opinion, building walls, (an obvious shot at Trump) that the Pope says will send you to hell or having an abortion that is murder according to the official position of the church that the Pope seems to ignore?

And should Joe Biden, who is the most famous and powerful Catholic in the world, be denied communion for not only supporting abortion, but wanting us all to pay for it?

 
Thanks for the answering the question about Mary.

Original sin can't prevail over God, but God left our universe over it and humans lost their domain over Earth (paradise originally) to Satan. Original sin prevails over humans, so that is the HUGE problem. It means the paradise meant for all of us will only be for a few. It means God will have to destroy ALL humans by water and fire even though Jesus saves the believers.

Jesus never said anything about Original sin.
 
Each politician has their own choice: Be a model Catholic as they are in the public eye; or choose another faith that better represents their own beliefs
Catholics have traditionally recognized the separation of Church and State
When Catholic JFK ran for President, he made it clear that his loyalty was to the laws of the United States and NOT the Pope

Biden is in the same boat. He cannot place his Catholic Values above the law of the land.

So he supports Birth Control, Voluntary Sterilization, Divorce and abortion rights.
 
Catholics have traditionally recognized the separation of Church and State
When Catholic JFK ran for President, he made it clear that his loyalty was to the laws of the United States and NOT the Pope

Biden is in the same boat. He cannot place his Catholic Values above the law of the land.

So he supports Birth Control, Voluntary Sterilization, Divorce and abortion rights.
Those are not the problem. The problem is pushing for abortion up the ninth month and working towards having taxpayers to pay for abortions. If free will is the court they wish to play on, then taxpayers should be able to opt out of paying for abortions (should this ever become law).
 
Those are not the problem. The problem is pushing for abortion up the ninth month and working towards having taxpayers to pay for abortions. If free will is the court they wish to play on, then taxpayers should be able to opt out of paying for abortions (should this ever become law).
Where do you draw the line on adhering to the Catholic Faith vs doing your job?

There is no abortion at nine months and taxpayers do not fund abortions.

Should a Catholic politician support public funding of Birth Control ? His faith demands he not

How about Police, lawyers, judges?
Should they enforce laws that are contrary to their Catholic Faith?
 
Where do you draw the line on adhering to the Catholic Faith vs doing your job?
Where do they diverge? There is no divergence in me doing my job and the Catholic faith. Why do politicians make this divergence? And when they diverge are the true representatives of the Catholic faith?
 
Where do you draw the line on adhering to the Catholic Faith vs doing your job?

There is no abortion at nine months and taxpayers do not fund abortions.

Should a Catholic politician support public funding of Birth Control ? His faith demands he not

How about Police, lawyers, judges?
Should they enforce laws that are contrary to their Catholic Faith?
What laws, specifically, are these?
 
Where do they diverge? There is no divergence in me doing my job and the Catholic faith. Why do politicians make this divergence? And when they diverge are the true representatives of the Catholic faith?
Politicians make this divergence because the swear an oath to defend the Constitution. That means putting the law of the land over the laws of the Church.

We do not have Sharia Law
 
His faith certainly does not support public funding of birth control.

That is why he must defer to the laws of the land.
His faith also does not allow him to recognize remarriage after divorce or accept gay marriages

But a Catholic Politician must put his faith aside and do his job.
 
An imaginary problem that does not exist.
An imaginary problem that does not exist?

From the Democratic Party Platform:

Because we believe in the privacy and equality of women, we stand proudly for a woman’s right to choose, consistent with Roe v. Wade, and regardless of her ability to pay. We stand firmly against Republican efforts to undermine that right. At the same time, we strongly support family planning and adoption incentives. Abortion should be safe, legal, and rare.

Just who do you think THEY THINK will pay?
 

Forum List

Back
Top